The DOI matches its Crossref record; 33 of the 33 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Hybrid type checking
Open accessAbstract
Traditional static type systems are very effective for verifying basic interface specifications, but are somewhat limited in the kinds specifications they support. Dynamically-checked contracts can enforce more precise specifications, but these are not checked until run time, resulting in incomplete detection of defects. Hybrid type checking is a synthesis of these two approaches that enforces precise interface specifications, via static analysis where possible, but also via dynamic checks where necessary. This paper explores the key ideas and implications of hybrid type checking, in the context of the simply-typed A-calculus with arbitrary refinements of base types.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Object-Oriented Software Construction
Meyer, B. (1988) · UCLA - Biblioteca de Ciencias y Tecnologia Felix Morales Bueno · Cited by 4,011
The Java Language Specification
Gosling, J., Joy, B., & Steele, G. L. (1996) · Cited by 3,924
DART: directed automated random testing
Godefroid, P., Klarlund, N., & Sen, K. (2005) · ACM SIGPLAN Notices · doi:10.1145/1064978.1065036 · Cited by 2,067
Object-oriented software construction
America, P. (1989) · Science of Computer Programming · doi:10.1016/0167-6423(89)90034-8 · Cited by 2,008
Necula, G. C. (1997) · Proceedings of the 24th ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT symposium on Principles of programming languages - POPL '97 · doi:10.1145/263699.263712 · Cited by 1,843
DART: directed automated random testing
Godefroid, P., Klarlund, N., & Sen, K. (2005) · Proceedings of the 2005 ACM SIGPLAN conference on Programming language design and implementation · doi:10.1145/1065010.1065036 · Cited by 1,570
Extended static checking for Java
Flanagan, C., Leino, K. R. M., Lillibridge, M., Nelson, G., Saxe, J. B., & Stata, R. (2002) · Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN 2002 conference on Programming language design and implementation · doi:10.1145/512529.512558 · Cited by 1,340
Self-citationA Syntactic Approach to Type Soundness
Wright, A. K., & Felleisen, M. (1994) · Information and Computation · doi:10.1006/inco.1994.1093 · Cited by 1,136
Simplify: a theorem prover for program checking
Detlefs, D., Nelson, G., & Saxe, J. B. (2005) · Journal of the ACM · doi:10.1145/1066100.1066102 · Cited by 786
A technique for software module specification with examples
Parnas, D. L. (1972) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/355602.361309 · Cited by 726
Cited by
Stateful Contracts for Affine Types
Tov, J. A., & Pucella, R. (2010) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-11957-6_29 · Cited by 43
Metadata
- Authors
- Flanagan, C.
- Venue
- Conference record of the 33rd ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT symposium on Principles of programming languages
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2006-01-11
- Pages
- 245-256
- OpenAlex
- W2141210774
- Cited by
- 265
- References
- 33
- FWCI
- 18.97
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Hybrid type checking. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1145/1111037.1111059
- The paper
- Flanagan, C. (2006). Hybrid type checking. Conference record of the 33rd ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT symposium on Principles of programming languages. https://doi.org/10.1145/1111037.1111059
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.